Regarding Nestorius' Christology

1. If any one does not acknowledge that Emmanuel is truly God, and that the holy Virgin is, in consequence, "Theotokos," for she gave birth in the flesh to the Word of God, who has become flesh, let them be condemned.

2. If any one does not acknowledge that the Word of God the Father was substantially (kath' hypostasin) united with the flesh, and with his own flesh is one Christ, that is, one and the same God and human being together, let them be condemned.

3. If any one divides the person in the one Christ after their union, joining them together in a mere conjunction in accordance with their rank, or a conjunction effected by authority or power, instead of a combination according to a union of natures, let them be condemned.

4. If any one distributes between two characters or persons the expressions used about Christ in the gospels, and apostolic writings. . . applying some to the human being, conceived of separately, apart from the Word, . . . and others exclusively to the Word, let them be condemned.

5. If any one dares to call Christ a "God-bearing human being" (theophoros anthropos). . . let them be anathema.

6. If any one says that the Word of God the Father is the god or master of Christ, instead of confessing that this Christ is both God and a human being. . . let them be condemned.

7. If any one says that Jesus as a human being was controlled by God the Word, and that the "glory of the only begotten" was attached to him, as something existing apart from himself, let them be condemned.

8. If anyone dares to say that "the human being who was assumed is to be worshipped together with the Divine Word". . . let them be condemned.

9. If anyone says that the one Lord Jesus Christ was glorified by the Spirit, as if Christ used a power alien to himself which came to him through the Spirit. . .let them be condemned. . . .

12. If anyone does not confess that the Word of God suffered in the flesh, and was crucified in the flesh, and tasted death in the flesh. . . let them be condemned.

On the Incarnation

. . . In declaring that the Word was made to "be incarnate" and "made human," we do not assert that there was any change in the nature of the Word when it became flesh, or that it was transformed into an entire human being, consisting of soul and body; but we say that the Word, in an indescribable and inconceivable manner, united personally to himself flesh endowed with a rational soul, and thus became a human being and was called the Son of man. And this was not by a mere act of will or favor, nor simply adopting a role or taking to himself a person. The natures which were brought together to form a true unity were different; but out of both is one Christ and one Son. We do not mean that the difference of the natures is annihilated by reason of this union; but rather that the divinity and humanity, by their inexpressible and inexplicable concurrence into unity, have produced for us the one Lord and Son Jesus Christ. It is in this sense that he is said to have been born of a woman after the flesh, though he existed and was begotten from the Father before all ages. . . . It was not that an ordinary human being was first born of the holy Virgin, and that afterwards the Word descended upon him. He was united in the flesh in the womb itself, and thus is said to have undergone a birth after the flesh, inasmuch as he made his own the birth of his own flesh.

In the same way we say that he "suffered and rose again." We do not mean that God the Word suffered blows or the piercing of nails or other wounds in his own nature, in that the divine is impassible because it is not physical. But the body which had become his own body suffered these things, and therefore he himself is said to have suffered them for us. The impassible was in the body which suffered.